28 U.S.C. § 1868
Maintenance and inspection of records
After the master jury wheel is emptied and refilled pursuant to section 1863(b)(4) of this title, and after all persons selected to serve as jurors before the master wheel was emptied have completed such service, all records and papers compiled and maintained by the jury commission or clerk before the master wheel was emptied shall be preserved in the custody of the clerk for four years or for such longer period as may be ordered by a court, and shall be available for public inspection for the purpose of determining the validity of the selection of any jury.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1970–2023 · leading case: State of Iowa v. Kelvin Plain Sr.
State of Iowa v. Kelvin Plain Sr. (2017)
“26, with 28 U.S.C. § 1868 . Unlike the federal law, however, which requires the selection authority to make the records and papers it compiled and 37 maintained “available for public inspection for the purpose of determining the validity of the selection of any jury,” 28 U.”
Bill Wayne Shepherd v. Billy Wellman (2002)
“We also reject Blum’s argument that his requests for the juror qualification forms from Ford I were authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 1868 . Section 1868 permits the public to inspect the record and papers compiled by the jury commission solely “for the purpose of determining the…”
United States v. Armsbury (1976)
“§ 1867 (f), and 28 U.S.C. § 1868 , does suggest that the Clerk of the Court has a responsibility to keep records: 28 U.”
State v. Rivers (2023)
“” 28 U.S.C. § 1868 ; see also 28 U.S.C. § 1867 (allowing defendants to present such records as evidence in challenging the jury selection process).”
McDonnell v. United States (1993)
“McDonnell next points to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1868 as permitting identity of grand jurors to be made a matter of public record upon court order after a mandatory four-year period.”
United States v. William G. Lachance, William F. Zimmerli, John Schlagenhauf and Thomas Ciccaglione (1986)
“See 28 U.S.C. § 1868 (permitting destruction after four years).”
United States v. Braunstein (1979)
“6(b)(2), the motion is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1867 (e), while the selection method is established by 28 U.”
United States v. Huber (1978)
“The defendant charges that “the Jury Clerk for the Southern District of New York does not maintain and preserve the records of all transactions involved in the jury selection process under the present General Services Administration Automated System,” Defendant’s Memorandum at…”
United States v. Robinson (2003)
“And, he must physically come to the courthouse to inspect the records pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1868 . Accordingly, Defendant’s motion is denied.”
United States v. Charles Thomas James, Jr. (1971)
“” Jurors in the District of Oregon are selected at random from voter registration lists under a plan adopted by the court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1868 , a part of the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968.”
United States v. Mitchell (1974)
“Secondly, the defendant has failed to demonstrate that the unsupplemented use of voter registration lists produces non-representative jury panels.”
United States v. Ronald Wayne Beaty (1972)
“§ 1867 (f) relates to inspection of records before the challenge motion and that 28 U.S.C. § 1868 permits an inspection of records in the possession of the clerk.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.